Eichmann and the Sassen Tapes

[Nessie]

https://www.nizkor.org/session-088-04-eichmann-adolf/

"Q. You do admit, therefore, that you were an accomplice to
the murder of millions of Jews?

A. No, that I cannot admit. From the human – let me say
from the point of view of human guilt, a question which I
have to judge in a much graver manner, because in this
respect I must sit in judgment with myself – in this respect
I must admit that I have played my part, though under
orders. From the legal point of view, as a recipient of
orders, I had no choice but to carry out the orders I
received. How far the fact that I had to carry out part of
the deportations and that the Jews who were thus deported
found their death, how far I am legally guilty is a question
which, in my opinion, should be left until the question of
responsibility has been examined."

Note that at no time did Eichmann dispute that millions of Jews had been murdered and offer an alternative, whereby millions of Jews, of which he admits to being part of the deportations, remained alive. He only denies being an accomplice to the murders.

Eichmann, like every single Nazi who has ever been put on trial, failed to provide any evidence that would support so-called revisionist claims of no mass murders and evidence to construct a revised chronology of events.

[Wahrheitssucher]

.
Deceivers, delusional believers and gullible victims of false histories claim that Eichmann never denied being involved in a genocidal plan to mass-murder Jews in what the atrocity propaganda calls ‘death camps’.

This is false!
Eichmann definitely did deny all that.

The reason why his denial of this false accusation is not widely known is because it has been — and still is being — concealed by the racist, anti-German, holyH promoters.

I have posted this FACT before, with the verifiable reference, numerous times at RODOH. So anyone who was addictively involved in discussion there will already know this. Therefore proving that such people are dishonest and/or delusional if they claim Eichmann confessed his knowing involvement in the alleged mass-murder-of-all-Jews policy.

SUMMARY: it is ironically such people who are the actual ‘deniers’ of accurate history.

. . . . . . . . .

The following words are taken from the published account of an American Christian Pastor who had permission to visit Eichmann in prison with his German wife acting as translator. He wanted to get Eichmann to fully confess to his crimes and seek forgiveness from God so that his ‘eternal soul’ could receive ‘salvation’.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

This is the letter I handed him:

Jerusalem, Israel,
21st of May, 1962.

Dear Adolf Eichmann;
The enclosed paper has been drawn up for you to sign. I have prepared this as speedily as possible so that it may be made public before the appeal judgment has been made known.
The appeal judgment has already been written and cannot be affected by your signing this paper. On the other hand for this confession to be made public at this time before the official judgment is made known would greatly increase the confidence of the world public in the sincerity of your motives in signing this paper.
I believe that it would be a brave and courageous act for you to sign this confession as it is written at this time and that you will feel better and sleep better and be ready to meet God.
Very sincerely yours,
Signed: William L. Hull

The confession form was as follows:

Desiring to make atonement to God and to man as much as lies within my power, I, Adolf Eichmann, do hereby now repent of all my sins and acknowledge my unworthiness of forgiveness by God and man.

I do confess that in obedience to orders and instructions from my superior officers in the National Socialist German Reich (Third Reich) I, SS Obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann, head of the Office IV B 4, RSHA, did:

1. Arrange for the transport of Jews and others from various countries of Europe to death camps in Germany and Poland as a result of which millions of Jews and others were put to death.

2. Beyond asking for a transfer, make no real effort to be relieved of my command and duties and did remain in my position as head of the department responsible for the final solution of the Jewish question until the year 1945.

3. Remain a member of the Nazi Party from 1932 until the end of the war in 1945 knowing that an important part of its policy was to persecute and eventually exterminate the Jewish race from the earth. As a voluntary and continuing member of the Nazi Party I bear my share of responsibility for all the acts of the Party.

4. Perform my duties in a manner which gave little chance for the survival of any Jew who came under my jurisdiction.

I do hereby testify to my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Saviour of the world.
I do hereby accept the Lord Jesus Christ as my Saviour and believe that through my faith in Him my sins are forgiven by the grace of God and that I am now ready to stand before God.

Eichmann read the first two paragraphs and his face began to darken. He frowned and became wild-looking.
And then, angrily, as he read point one, he said:

EICHMANN: This is false, this is false.
It is not true.
I am not guilty.
I could not sign this, it is not true.

(He reads point two.) This also is not true.

(He reads point three.) I cannot sign this.

(He reads point four.) I will not sign…

HULL:
…I do not want you to sign something you do not believe. I want you to read this carefully. You claim that you pray. Pray about this. There is no hurry. Think it over and pray about it.
I have tried to make it very easy for you. The world and the Christians who are praying for you will not be satisfied with anything less.

EICHMANN: Even in the court they did not accuse me of all this.

~ From ‘The struggle for a soul’ by Pastor W.L.Hull, Chapter 16, pgs.113-115.

[Nessie]

Eichmann's CV was full of work regarding the organisation of the transportation, deportation and the Final Solution. If there was a mass resettlement programme, that meant by 1944, millions of Jews arrested 1939-44 were now settled, he would have known about it. Instead, he said nothing. Not to Sassen, not the court in Jerusalem, nor to anyone else he spoke to.

[Wetzelrad]

The following words are taken from the published account of an American Christian Pastor who had permission to visit Eichmann in prison with his German wife acting as translator.

That's interesting. I had missed this. It's amazing how many times I've been asked to put my faith in certain Nazi confessions which are parroted by every major media organization, while contrary claims like these are given such short shrift that even I in searching for them never hear about them.

[Stubble]

Some, food for thought;

https://www.wral.com/story/isabel-kersh ... /20363390/

From the article;

[...]The documentary was recently screened for commanders and officers of the intelligence corps — an indication of the importance with which it has been viewed in Israel.[...]

So, it would appear that this documentary at least, is 'Hasbara Approved'...

Also from the article;

The German authorities and the owner of the tapes gave the filmmakers free access to 15 hours of surviving audio. (Sassen had recorded about 70 hours, but he had taped over many of the expensive reels after transcribing them.) Mozer said that the owner of the tapes and the archive had finally agreed to give the filmmakers access, believing that they would treat the material respectfully and responsibly.

And thus, what was actually on the tapes, will never be known...

What is known is that they represent a valuable 'tool' for 'holocaust promoters'.

Do I doubt that Mr Geysers of Blood himself may have promoted the exterminationist narrative in the tapes?

>no<

The man claimed a Soviet submarine engine was used as an instrument of death and made all sorts of other ludicrous claims.

With the 'event' being considered an 'established fact' under the law, after the tortured confession of Hoess, what was left for him as a legal defense was 'just following orders'.

In the end he still danced at the end of a rope, as did so many others.

A thing that gets ignored by holocaust promoters is the simple problem presented by the confession of Hoess given the legal framework in place. None could deny as a defense. Many incorporated the insane into their confessions, in my opinion, as a tell to the future and as a grounds for appeal did they not dance at the end of a rope.

Of course, this bit of legal fact is always dismissed, as with the controlling of the narrative by judges and other nefarious goings on, and yet, it remains, a matter of record.

The Einsatzgruppen commanders were hung because there was no order, Eichmann was hung because he said there was. In the end, there was no defense that could exonerate the accused after the narrative was set. All Eichmann could do, and did do, was try to get as many details about the orthodox narrative as possible and to downplay any responsibility. Even this failed to spare his neck.

Had he 'denied' the 'established facts', he would have been excluded from speaking on his own behalf.

Had I been in his shoes, I wouldn't have tried to 'play the game' to 'save my skin'. I'd have told the unvarnished truth such as I knew it and let the chips fall.

Unfortunately, Mr Eichmann was not such a man.

[Nessie]

The following words are taken from the published account of an American Christian Pastor who had permission to visit Eichmann in prison with his German wife acting as translator.

That's interesting. I had missed this. It's amazing how many times I've been asked to put my faith in certain Nazi confessions which are parroted by every major media organization, while contrary claims like these are given such short shrift that even I in searching for them never hear about them.

Those who seek to deny their involvement in the crime, rather than the crime itself, or, the guilty who are lying, or both, will trip themselves up.

[Wahrheitssucher]

Here is the statement that Eichmann signed "voluntarily" when he was captured by the Israelis.

I, the undersigned, Adolf Eichmann, state herewith of my own free will: Since my true identity has now been revealed, I realise that there is no point in my continuing to try to avoid justice. I declare myself willing to proceed to Israel and to stand trial there before a competent court.
It is understood that I will receive legal counsel and I shall try to recount, without any embroidery, the facts relating to my last years of service in Germany, so that a true picture of the events may be transmitted to future generations. I am submitting this declaration of my own free will, I have not been promised anything and I have not been threatened. I want at last to achieve inner peace.
As I am unable to remember all the details and may also mix things up, I request that I be helped by putting at my disposal of documents and testimony to assist me in my endeavor to establish the truth.

Does anyone seriously believe this was voluntary?
The language used here, saying that he wants to provide a true picture for "future generations" is extremely similar to what Ben Gurion was saying at the time about the purpose of the trial.

Note at the end as well that there's a reference to having Eichmann study from other sources.
In his interrogation notes it says as well they were using Reitlinger's books as a reference.
That contaminates the testimony and completely defeats the point of getting a primary source testimony.

Excellent points!
As mentioned previously, a very powerful tool of coercion concerns threats to a victim’s family, viz threats against the life of his wife and children.

Even as someone completely innocent of any involvement in the treatment of jews in wartime Europe, I myself curtailed for a considerable period my activity arguing against the obviously false aspects of the narrative. And the reason was to protect my children from embarrassment, awkward situations and possible career damage.

We all know what happened to courageous German soldiers who had been at Auschwitz like Thies Christophersen and Wilhelm Stäglich.
We also know the persecution and career destruction of uninvolved, noble, Germanic people like Walter Lüfftl, Ernst Zündel, Jürgen Graf and Ursula Haverbeck.
If that can happen to people completely uninvolved in any way with the alleged crimes, then I suggest decent, fair-minded, honest people should be able to acknowledge that the likelihood of threats being made to Adolf Eichmann regarding the safety of his family in order to get him to make certain statements is EXTREMELY LIKELY!

HERE IS A QUESTION I once put to a club of die-hard, holyH true-BELIEVERS (i.e. non-SKEPTICS) at a forum for ‘skeptics’ https://skepticforum.mu.nu/viewtopic.ph ... 6f#p741507.

The Sassen interviews and Stangneth’s book came up in my replies to their avoidance.

Q: Anyone care to explain why — if this compulsory historical narrative were based on reality — did Adolf Eichmann on trial for his life “confess” to being told a captured, Soviet, submarine diesel engine was the engine of choice for producing a lethal gas?

“He told me how he had made everything here hermetically sealed, that everything had been sealed, since an engine of a Russian submarine was going to operate here and the gases of this engine were going to be directed inside and the Jews would be poisoned.”
~ Adolf Eichmann

According to the lie-witness Wiernik, this engine that created the poisonous exhaust used to kill 800,000 people was ALSO the very same one used to generate the electricity supplying the whole camp Treblinka 2.
One engine for the camps electricity AND for the alleged mass gassings.

I hope skeptic-adverse true-believers will admit that's an engine with a crucial function for the key Aktion Reinhardt camp.

What would the excellent engineers from Germany choose to use for such an important engine? One that needed to BOTH a.) produce the required amount of carbon monoxide for the homicidal gassings when required, while b.) simultaneously generating electricity to operate the camp and thus being required to be running 24 hours a day, EVERY DAY?

What's it going to be?

CHOICE 1. They decided: “Oh, let's get a non-existent* captured Soviet submarine and take the diesel engine from that.”

CHOICE 2. They decided: “Hmmm. How about an engine from some captured Soviet tank or military tractor?”

Why choose a Russian engine at all?
Why do that for a supposedly meticulously planned, co-ordinated and designed 'final solution' Aktion Reinhard camp intending to systematically and efficiently mass-murder nearly a million people at Treblinka? Just grab any old obsolete engine you can find lying around to both supply the required electrical supply AND the poisonous gas?
Why would they choose that for TREBLINKA 2 when in November 1940 the Auschwitz camp had been equipped with a totally new German diesel engine to run as a back-up generator for its emergency electric supply.

And recall that Jankel Wiernik claimed that this 'designed' system with the crucial engine was the new, improved version of mass-murder:

“The engine which generated the gas in the new chambers was defective, and so the helpless victims had to suffer for hours on end before they died. Satan himself could not have devised a more fiendish torture”.
— Jankel Wiernik

*N.B. “non-existent”* = no Soviet submarines were "captured" during WW2.

I had to explain to them that this was NOT arguing that the "gas chambers were physically impossible", but that a hermetically sealed one having gas pumped in by a combustion engine was and STILL IS.

WHY — if these people really had been involved in a mass-murder — did they need to invent OBVIOUSLY impractical lies?

Diesel engine exhaust is a hopelessly impractical method of mass-murder.
It's not physically possible to pump engine exhaust into an airtight room for very long.
There were no Soviet submarines captured, to be able to use its engine.
There were no Soviet tanks made matching Fuchs' very specific description.
Etc., etc., etc., etc.

…Try to read, understand, and then answer the following simple questions.
Q. If you "hermetically seal" a room or building and then pump poisonous engine exhaust into it:
i.) what will happen to the atmospheric pressure within the room/building?
ii.) what effect will that have on the the room/building?
iii.) what effect will that have on the the motor/engine?

I also had to explain that Eichmann's testimony was nonsense because that is what you usually get with coerced testimony from captives who don't know anything about the crime they are accused of. Prisoners who feel coerced give their interrogators what they think they want to hear and so make up stuff the best they can.

Adolf Eichmann: “I no longer recall what was the name of that place. I am confusing this, for I am unable to say whether it was called Treblinka or otherwise.
...I reached this place and there was something in the form of a forest.
...He spoke the dialect of the south-western region of Germany, and he told me how he had made everything here hermetically sealed, that everything had been sealed, since an engine of a Russian submarine was going to operate here and the gases of this engine were going to be directed inside and the Jews would be poisoned.”

I also had to explain to St.Mech that the Sassen interviews are not trustworthy verbatim transcripts.

QUOTE 1:
“In Eichmann before Jerusalem, Stangneth describes how Willem Sassen grew infatuated with Hitler in his youth.
She tells me how, after Eichmann’s capture, Sassen protected [him] by manipulating the transcripts of their discussions and never going public with the original recordings”.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/saski ... g-chapter/

>< >< >< ><

QUOTE 2:
.“...during 1955-1956, Sassen taped Eichmann regarding Eichmann's life experiences; Sassen's edited texts did not entirely reflect what Eichmann had dictated to him; Eichmann was dissatisfied with Sassen's edit and he instructed Sassen to use only the excerpts that Eichmann approved; Sassen showed himself to be an untrustworthy partner and did not follow Eichmann's instructions; Sassen's final text of the interviews [eventually] reached the Prosecution in the Eichmann Trial.”

https://portal.ehri-project.eu/units/il ... 7-10622517

I then had to explain to them the following:

“I am just presenting the known facts — with references, so anyone can check — about the unreliability of the so-called 'Sassen interviews' that have been released piecemeal.
Ignoring it [their unreliability] or denying it, would ironically be genuinely worthy of the description 'denier'.”

This isn't about a 1961 nonsensical claim of a non-existent captured soviet submarine engine at Treblinka used as a mass-murder weapon.
Just as it isn't about Jankel Wiernik's 1945 lie about it being a captured Soviet tank engine at Treblinka used as a mass-murder weapon.
Nor is it about Erich Fuch's confirmation in a 1963 interrogation testimony giving specific details that match no known Soviet tank engine.
Can't any of you see what this is about?
Its not about types of engines at all!

It is about putting the enforced Treblinka narrative in its proper historical context by applying rigorous critical analysis to its key component part: viz. the alleged mass-gassing of approximately 800,000 people.

The question asked for a credible explanation for WHY — if this compulsory historical narrative were based on reality — did Adolf Eichmann on trial for his life “confess” to nonsense that couldn't possibly be true for numerous reasons? WHY would someone as supposedly heavily involved in the conspiracy to mass-murder 11 million people, need to invent scenarios that are impractical inventions?

So forget Eichmann and forget submarines. The question is really asking WHY — if these people really had been involved in a mass-murder — did they need to invent OBVIOUSLY impractical lies?

Diesel engine exhaust is a hopelessly impractical method of mass-murder.
It's not physically possible to pump engine exhaust into an airtight room for very long.
There were no Soviet submarines captured, to be able to use its engine.
There were no Soviet tanks made matching Fuchs' very specific description.
Etc., etc., etc., etc.

____

Here below are the questions and the answers I received.
They reveal a great deal about the understanding of the people giving them.

Q: Why did a supposedly key operator and eye-witness confess to being told an obvious nonsense and impractical lie?

QUOTE: “That can be explained by rumour and mistakes”. — NESSIE.

QUOTE: “You're asking why did they pick a Russian engine and not a German engine? Because it was salvaged from nearby destroyed Russian vehicles, probably”.

QUOTE: "Eichmann probably didn't remember it correctly. I think it's not even a topic worthy to discuss". — OOZY

QUOTE: “Resourcefulness”. — DUKE/DARREN WILSHACK

QUOTE: "The Germans did a lot of scavenging. Why use a brand new engine badly needed somewhere else when a second hand engine would work just as well?" — JEFF

QUOTE: “Eichmann's various testimonies about his supposed visits to Treblinka are difficult”.(No, REALLY? You don't say? )

QUOTE: "This is anything but a compulsory narrative". — Stat.MECHANICAL

QUOTE: “Eichmann was wrong...” — NG (duh! )

Yeah. (sigh). But WHY was Eichmann “wrong”?
WHY are Eichmann's various testimonies “difficult”?

WHY are ALL the eye-witness testimonies upon which the whole narrative for a Treblinka mass-gassing and mass cremation — ON THE SCALE CLAIMED with the disappearance of empirical evidence — is based, WHY are they ALL "difficult" and "wrong" ON SUCH A KEY POINT?

These true-believers couldn’t understand the simple point that if there were no Soviet submarine's captured, then the reason why Eichmann claimed they'd used an engine from one cannot be 'resourcefulness'.

. . .

If Eichmann had really “pulled up the roots of Revisionism with Sassen”, as claimed, then why aren't the audio-recordings made freely available, and an accurate transcript (and translation) made easily available to both historians and the public?

Yet no-one there could provide a link to the complete transcripts or even a part of the transcripts!

The majority of true-believers couldn’t admit it is because — as one of them said with considerable understatement — they are "difficult". I.e. "difficult" to reconcile with the currently enforced holocaust narrative.
Nor could they admit that that is why court historians cherry-pick only particular parts to reveal to the public in their books.
It’s like the Catholic church keeping the Bible in Latin for centuries, so that the masses couldn't read it and assess its values for themselves.

It seems reasonable to assume that if the Sassen tapes were so devastatingly conclusive, it would be a prominent, widely available primary source.
Yet, it isn't.

Just as Mengele's uncoerced writings, memoirs and explanations, written in freedom in Brazil, aren’t available to study, but were instead bought by a wealthy, Jewish, European, illegal-settler in occupied Palestine and archived away.

The OBVIOUS logical conclusion is that these 'confessions' DO NOT support the irrational compulsory, legally-protected, mass-gassing, holyH belief system. They do the opposite! That's why they are admitted to be “difficult”.

. . .

Q: ARE THE SASSEN TAPES — or A COMPLETE TRANSCRIPT OF THEM — AVAILABLE ANYWHERE ONLINE?
Answer: NO THEY ARE NOT.

Q: Can they be accessed anywhere?
A: NONE of these supposed ‘skeptics’ came with a reply.

They just believed that because Stangneth had read them and put her true-believer spin on it all, that was sufficient.

Here is a repeat of the previous analogy to underline the point:
Q. Could an ordinary person have easy access to read the Bible in their own language and make their own mind up about its contents prior to the ‘reformation’?
A. No, they could not! And people like John Wycliffe who started the translating of it into the vernacular were persecuted as heretics and some were burnt at the stake by the 'old' order, true-believers of the compulsory creed, for beginning that undertaking.

Q. Can an ordinary person have easy access to read a transcript in ANY language of the Sassen recordings and make their own mind up about its contents?
A. No, they can not.

BOTTOM LINE:
If you have engineers building a system supposedly designed for the mass murdering of as many as possible of the eleven million Jews mentioned at Wannsee, why use a petrol engine at all when you have an even cheaper option available that does not require precious fuel and you could design a system that uses it? [See the writings of engineers F. Berg and W. Lüfftl]

Why use an ad hoc solution from a non existent engine that would have been impractical as it was a diesel engine, as was 'confessed' by Eichmann?

Why use an engine that you couldn't get parts for LIKE THE ONE CLAIMED by THE ONLY PERPETRATOR who 'confessed' to at least a credible and technically feasible petrol engine?
What a pity for the defenders of the ridiculous mass-gassing 'final solution' genocide narrative that he described one that had particular specifications belonging to no known vehicle.

The obvious explanation for these “difficult” testimonies by alleged 'perpetrators' and lie-witness ‘survivors’ is that they DID NOT give factual statements based on what they had IN REALITY experienced. They instead lied and made up 'details' for various reasons.

Here is one possibility: they felt they had no choice but to go along with the mass-gassing narrative, as to refute it was a crime. (Just like with the Salem witch trials).
So... Could they possibly have been making up details to make their 'confessions' sound convincing?

An honest witness would not need to embellish their story with invented detail and could admit what they no longer remembered. Only someone inventing and/or lying and needing to convince their listeners/interrogators would need to invent detail to sound convincing.

And that is why the mass-gassing holocaust narrative on the scale currently claimed is certain to eventually be admitted as an obvious exaggeration and deception.

While the so-called survivors were spinning their yarns and giving their talks at schools and making money from fraudulent 'memoirs', only other Jews dared expose their self-glorifying, racketeering dishonesty.
But now the last of these are dying, and the further future generations come from the emotionally enforced indoctrinstion, the more an impartial, intelligent reappraisal will become increasingly acceptable.

The further we come from the events, the more people will be able to look at the nonsense that was used to prop up this decrepitude with greater clarity.

The type of people posing as skeptics at https://skepticforum.mu.nu/viewtopic.ph ... 6f#p742173 will one day be seen as the deluded, last-ditch, belligerent followers who remained dogmatically attached to what was a colossal, war-propaganda mass-delusion.

Bettina Stangneth's whole premise in her book is that Eichmann was a calculatedly-evil liar and she set out to expose those lies and categorise them.
But obviously to be able to do that any honest researcher would FIRST have to know what was the truth.
Wouldn't you?
Yes you would.
But WE as a global society don’t know the truth.
Which is why Revisionists want an open debate and access to the archives.
And that is precisely why the defenders of the Shoah shibbolith won’t allow either, and instead persecute revisionists and genuine skeptics.

We the public also don’t know what Eichmann actually said in Argentina to Sassen.
That's not surprising as the people alive, who the guardians of the holyH-narrative have allowed to read and listen to all that, can be counted on one hand.

The simple point being avoided by the holyH defenders at that ‘Skeptic’ forum is that there is nothing from the Sassen interviews in any quantity in any book or accessible internet archive.

Yet anyone can easily read the writings of Rudolf Höss.
Anyone can freely and easily access the speeches of Adolf Hitler.
Anyone can freely and easily access the translated (and edited) transcripts of the Nuremburg show trials.
Same with many other show-trials including Eichmann's in Tel Aviv.
Anyone can read the interviews with those men on trial at Nuremburg written by the Jewish psychoanalysts Leon Goldensohn and Gustave Gilbert, and by Douglas Kelley a U.S. army psychiatrist.
I've been able to read all the above plus the transcripts of the trial at Bergen Belsen, the pre-trial interrogation of Rudolf Höss and Ernst Kaltenbrunner, etc., etc.

But the recorded statements of Eichmann in Argentina?...hardly anything has been published or made available.
This is the fact that those holyH-believers there were avoiding and obfuscating.

Yet, if they were so blatantly incriminating as Holyhoax-defenders believe, then THEY WOULD CERTAINLY be made freely available.

Eichmann's 1300 page memoir written while in captivity in Israel was initially not released to his sons who asserted their legal right to it, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE Israeli's believed what it contained could be used "to deny the holocaust":

“Release of the manuscript was initially blocked for fear that it would be used by neo-Nazi groups to deny the Holocaust”.

It WAS kept in Israel and off-limits until 1999.
For forty years the Israelis kept it under wraps. And they DID give that reason for doing so.

Another explanation has been suggested that is was because his book revealed that he had been in negotiations with certain elite Hungarian Jews on a deal to sacrifice the majority in return for safe passage to Palestine for ten thousand of them:

“When I obtained Eichmann's transcripts and reminiscences, dictated in 1956-58 in Argentina, in October 1991 it generated a worldwide furor, with newspapers printing major articles around the globe for several days. There was near-panic among the world's Jewish historians, and I did not at that moment understand why, not having at that time had the leisure or requirement to study the pages' contents in detail. I now understand better: the negotiations between the Hungarian Jewish leaders, who declared themselves willing, indeed eager, to sacrifice the Jewish "mob" as they put it to Eichmann, in return for his allowing the ten thousand or so elite to emigrate to Palestine, made a very unattractive story.“
-- David Irving
[http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Eichmann/MosheKam.html

Regarding the understanding that the transcripts of the Sassen tapes aren't accurate, Stangneth says that that's an old myth, conjured up by Eichmann, and that she's authenticated the transcripts using the tapes.

But anyone who uses her unevidenced claim as slam-dunk evidence is appealing to a biased authority.
It is the same as religious belief, claiming their own religion’s high-priests as irrefutable authority.
I.e. it is faithful, true-believer illogicality.

[Stubble]

Access to the tapes is very tightly controlled and the tapes themselves are not contiguous. We are told this is because tape was expensive and so the tapes were recorded over and over again, and so many hours were lost.

If you are a researcher or member of the media with the 'correct' bonifidies, then, you can access them. If I recall correctly, anything you intend to print must be reviewed first.

Yad Vashim seems to have at least part of the transcripts...Gotta take their word for it though...

https://collections.yadvashem.org/en/documents/10622517

Bonus link, 'The Eichmann Papers' — Mr David Irving (Robert Faurisson makes an appearance during the Q and A)

https://odysee.com/@montysthinkingoutsi ... V9yP6yCAYT

[Hektor]

Access to the tapes is very tightly controlled and the tapes themselves are not contiguous. We are told this is because tape was expensive and so the tapes were recorded over and over again, and so many hours were lost.

If you are a researcher or member of the media with the 'correct' bonifidies, then, you can access them. If I recall correctly, anything you intend to print must be reviewed first.

Yad Vashim seems to have at least part of the transcripts...Gotta take their word for it though...
...

Nowadays there is no technical reason to make the audio not available. This is fully about controlling (the narrative).

[Stubble]

Access to the tapes is very tightly controlled and the tapes themselves are not contiguous. We are told this is because tape was expensive and so the tapes were recorded over and over again, and so many hours were lost.

If you are a researcher or member of the media with the 'correct' bonifidies, then, you can access them. If I recall correctly, anything you intend to print must be reviewed first.

Yad Vashim seems to have at least part of the transcripts...Gotta take their word for it though...
...

Nowadays there is no technical reason to make the audio not available. This is fully about controlling (the narrative).

That's explicitly stated by TPTB. The flatly say the reason for the access restriction is fear 'of the material being misused by neo nazis'.

[Hektor]

Nowadays there is no technical reason to make the audio not available. This is fully about controlling (the narrative).

That's explicitly stated by TPTB. The flatly say the reason for the access restriction is fear 'of the material being misused by neo nazis'.

And per definition that's anybody that disagrees with their narrative.